There are few things my wife, Susan, and I want more in this life than to travel with our Boston terrier, Lilly. Toward that end, we would do almost anything.
Almost anything.
Before “Emotional Support” animals were green-lighted on planes with a note and a nod, we briefly considered slapping a counterfeit “Service Animal” vest on Lilly before heading to the airport. Aside from the fact that she hates wearing anything (she slithers and squirms in a raincoat she loathes more than the rain itself), we eventually reasoned that outfitting Lilly with a counterfeit vest was a form of stolen valor; it was a designation she hadn’t earned.
Two weeks ago, I asked my therapist whether he would be willing to write a letter or sign a form attesting to my need for an emotional support animal. I was quick to admit that the “stress” Susan and I experience while traveling without her had nothing to do with fears of nose-diving into The Rockies. Like so many vacationing pet parents, we just want our baby with us. My therapist was agreeable and suggested I bring him the form unique to the airline we were flying.
We didn’t have long to celebrate this development. Last week, the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) proposed new rules that would allow air carriers to accept only specially-trained dogs as service animals. Animals without documentation verifying their service animal training would be treated as ordinary pets and subject to a specific airlines’ rules and fees (must ride in a carrier that fits under the seat or in the cargo hold). Moreover, pets would be limited to dogs and cats — forget the peacock in aisle 22.
Management and unions welcomed the move, citing a rise in biting incidents, scuffles between trained and untrained animals and unsanitary conditions. Apparently, there are plenty of people taking advantage of the “Emotional Support” moniker without taking responsibility for their pet’s unique needs and behavior. We probably have them to thank for these new, proposed restrictions.
The public has 60 days to weigh in on the DOT proposal. Perhaps we can craft a solution to which most are amenable. Here are some thoughts:
First, let’s drop the cloak of “Emotional Support.” We want our pets with us, plain and simple. The fact that they keep us calm in general is a bonus.
Pet parents (and other travelers) should respect the special designation that “Service Animals” have earned. They’ve undergone extensive and rigorous training to address a disabled person’s unique physical and psychiatric challenges.
At the same time, an “ordinary” pet should not be excluded from flight because he or she has not cleared the ‘Service Animal” training bar. The DOT has declared that carriers must judge an individual service animal’s behavior, regardless of breed. Well-trained/behaved pets should receive the same consideration.
Those of us whose pets are well-behaved toward people and other pets should be allowed to travel with our pets in our lap. Even-tempered pets do not need to be stuffed in carriers and shoved under seats, some with barely enough clearance for a loaf of bread.
If our pet makes a mess, we must thoroughly clean it up with our own materials and disinfectant. Courtesy in the air is no different than courtesy on the ground.
Let’s pay the damn fees! I have no problem paying for the convenience of having my “ordinary” dog with us. My fur is not ruffled because a true “Service Animal” flies for free.
These proposed compromises mean that, sadly, not all pets would be able to fly, free of restrictions, with their human parents. Despite extensive behavioral training, some animals may not get on with unfamiliar people and other pets in a confined area for hours on end. Others may have medical issues, like incontinence, that preclude community travel. Alternate travel and temporary housing arrangements may be in order.
No disputing that air travel should be as safe and pleasant as possible for the greatest number of people.
No doubt that we have some kinks to work out if Lilly is to be our constant companion in the clouds.